Contrary to what Premil teaches: Revelation 20 does not locate Jesus on earth!

[Navair2]

So, you believe that people who had just spent 1000 years with Jesus in all His glory on the earth will think that they can go up against Him in Jerusalem and defeat Him? They would somehow not be aware that defeating Him would be impossible?

Yes I do believe that many of those who will spend 1,000 years under the yoke of "bondage" that is Christ's rule, will rebel against him at the end.
Deception is a very powerful thing, and Satan is a master of it.

God's people listen to God ( John 8:47 ), and the devil's children listen to him because they not only hate God and His Son ( Romans 1:30-32, John 3:19-20 ), at the end of 1,000 years when Satan is released for a season to deceive the nations ( Revelation 20:7-8 ), many who have hated being ruled in perfect righteousness will indeed listen to him.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Read it again, closely.

It says that the scoffers are willingly ignorant of the fact that the heavens and earth were created by God and that a great flood overflowed it.
It also says that the heavens and earth, in existence now, by the same word that created it are kept in store...reserved unto fire against the day of Judgment.

That Judgment takes place after the 1,000 years are over.
See Revelation 20:7-10 for the timeline.

He mentions the fire again in 2 Peter 3:10-12. It will burn up the heavens and the earth. I believe Revelation 20:9 speaks of the same thing. Why would you not think that the fire coming down upon the earth would not come down upon those scoffing at the idea of His second coming? What was the point of even mentioning the scoffers if the fiery wrath that Peter wrote about doesn't come down upon them?

 

[Navair2]

It looks like you just assume that what is described in Revelation 20 chronologically follows what is described in Revelation 19.

Yes I do.

Do you think the entire book is chronological? Clearly, what is described in Revelation 12 does not follow what is described at the end of Revelation 11 chronologically, right?

No I do not.

But when I read Revelation 12, I see that it is parenthetical.
It describes an event that has already happened...

"...there WAS war in Heaven..."

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Yes I do believe that many of those who will spend 1,000 years under the yoke of "bondage" that is Christ's rule, will rebel against him at the end.
Deception is a very powerful thing, and Satan is a master of it.

God's people listen to God ( John 8:47 ), and the devil's children listen to him because they not only hate God and His Son ( Romans 1:30-32, John 3:19-20 ), at the end of 1,000 years when Satan is released for a season to deceive the nations ( Revelation 20:7-8 ), many who have hated being ruled in perfect righteousness will indeed listen to him.

I don't think you understood my point. Wouldn't those same people have seen Christ in all His glory for a long time before that? Wouldn't they be fully aware that He is invincible and could not possibly be defeated after having that experience with Him on the earth all that time? I would certainly think so. So, they would be insane to go and try to defeat Him after that, knowing that He could not be defeated by mere mortals. That's my point.

 

[Navair2]

What was the point of even mentioning the scoffers if the fiery wrath that Peter wrote about doesn't come down upon them?

Have you not read of the Lake of Fire, and how everyone who is not in Christ will have His fiery wrath come down upon them?

His wrath comes upon people who hate Him at many different times according to the Bible:
At the Judgment, at the end of the 1,000 years, and even during Elijah's time.

 

[Navair2]

I don't think you understood my point. Wouldn't those same people have seen Christ in all His glory for a long time before that? Wouldn't they be fully aware that He is invincible and could not possibly be defeated after having that experience with Him on the earth all that time?

I understand your point perfectly.

Yes, they will be aware that Jesus cannot be defeated...
Yet, Satan will succeed in deceiving many into following him and attacking Jerusalem at the end of the 1,000 years.

Are you telling me that you don't believe God's word?

 

[Navair2]

Are you aware that Christ has been reigning and Christians have already been priests of God and of Christ a long time?

Are you aware that He is not yet reigning at Jerusalem, but is instead sitting at the right hand of God the Father making intercession for believers...until God makes His enemies His footstool?

His reign starts when He comes again, my friend.
Until then He waits for the time to be fulfilled.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I agree.

I'm sorry, but again I disagree.

Salvation is not a cooperative effort between men and God, and He's not waiting for "as many to repent as possible";
He's waiting for all of His elect to be born and to be called into the fellowship of the saints...
For the fullness of the Gentiles to come in so that He can then send His Son to earth the second time.

I'm not interested in getting into a debate about the meaning of 2 Peter 3:8-9 here. It's besides the point I'm making about what will happen to unbelievers when Christ returns.

The main takeaway from that passage as it relates to the point I'm making is that Peter is still talking about the second coming of Christ there because it says the Lord is not slack concerning His promise. What promise? The promise of His coming, as Peter had previously referenced in 2 Peter 3:4. So, Peter never changes the subject from His second coming at any point within 2 Peter 3:3-13.

He never refers to some time period after the second coming (except for saying we are looking forward to the new heavens and new earth). His main point is to talk about what will happen on the day Christ returns, which is that the heavens and earth will be burned up. He is coming to take vengeance on His enemies "in flaming fire" (2 Thess 1:7-10).

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I understand your point perfectly.

Yes, they will be aware that Jesus cannot be defeated...
Yet, Satan will succeed in deceiving many into following him and attacking Jerusalem at the end of the 1,000 years.

But, you believe Jesus will be there in Jerusalem, right? How could they think they could succeed in attacking Jerusalem if Jesus was there?

Are you telling me that you don't believe God's word?

Of course I do and you know that. Don't ask such a ridiculous question of a fellow Christian. I would never ask you a question like that. I'm telling you that I don't believe your interpretation of God's Word.

 

[Navair2]

All believers have part in Christ's resurrection (the first resurrection) by believing in Him and spiritually entering into His kingdom.

Our belief of the Gospel does not secure salvation for us...
We believe because we are ordained to eternal life ( Acts 13:48 ).

 

[Navair2]

But, you believe Jesus will be there in Jerusalem, right? How could they think they could succeed in attacking Jerusalem if Jesus was there?

That, my friend is the power of Satan.
Again, he is a master of deception.

If he can make false teachers believe false doctrines, and make people believe all kinds of things with lying sings and wonders, what makes you think he won't succeed in getting people who hate Jesus Christ to rebel against Him after 1,000 years of peace....chafing against the bit and bridle of the righteousness that they hate because of their sinful human natures never being changed?

 

[Navair2]

Of course I do and you know that. Don't ask such a ridiculous question of a fellow Christian. I would never ask you a question like that. I'm telling you that I don't believe your interpretation of God's Word.

I don't believe that the Bible needs "interpretation";
I hold that its very words need actual believing.

I've already given you the Scriptures in Revelation 20.
Is there something wrong with what they say?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Are you aware that He is not yet reigning at Jerusalem, but is instead sitting at the right hand of God the Father making intercession for believers...until God makes His enemies His footstool?

Why do you ask ridiculous questions like this? Please stop doing that. You're wasting your time. What do you think I'm going to say? "No, I wasn't aware of that. I thought for sure Jesus was reigning in Jerusalem right now. Thanks for correcting me.". Come on.

His reign starts when He comes again, my friend.
Until then He waits for the time to be fulfilled.

I didn't realize we were friends. We don't even know each other.

Do you not believe that He reigns now? Is He not our King now? Have you not been brought into His kingdom?

Colossians 1:12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

What about what He Himself said to His disciples just before He ascended to heaven?

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

He has all power in heaven and in earth but He doesn't reign? Really? What more power does He need in order to be reigning?

 

[Douggg]

But, you believe Jesus will be there in Jerusalem, right? How could they think they could succeed in attacking Jerusalem if Jesus was there?

Satan convinced a third of the angels to rebel against God, in God's presence there in heaven. So it will be nothing new that Satan will deceive the nations likewise for a short period of time at the end of the 1000 years. The heathen, i.e. them who won't like not being able to do as they please, as Jesus rules the nations with a rod of iron during that 1000 years, will be susceptible to Satan's cunning lies.

 

[TribulationSigns]

What difference does it make how many times it's mentioned? I've seen this argument several times before and it's utterly ridiculous. The beast is mentioned 30+ times in the book of Revelation. Does that make it a literal beast rather than a symbolic one?

Indeed! That is a good question.

 

[Navair2]

Do you not believe that He reigns now?

No.
Again, He is awaiting the time until His Father sends Him to earth the second time.
He will then take up His throne at Jerusalem.

Is He not our King now?

Yes.

Have you not been brought into His kingdom?

Spiritually, yes.
Physically, no.

He has all power in heaven and in earth but He doesn't reign?

Again, His physical reign will be at Jerusalem.
Do you believe the prophecies of Zechariah 12, Zechariah 14, Micah 4 and several other will be fulfilled literally, or not?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I don't believe that the Bible needs "interpretation";

What do you mean by that? Do you think it's no different than reading the newspaper or a magazine? Do you also believe that it doesn't need to be spiritually discerned?

1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I hold that its very words need actual believing.

Of course. But, we have to understand what the words are saying first. That is not just automatic. It requires revelation from the Holy Spirit.

I've already given you the Scriptures in Revelation 20.
Is there something wrong with what they say?

No, not at all. You have a bad habit of asking ridiculous questions. I believe Revelation 20 is true every bit as much as you do. I just don't agree with you on what it says.

 

[Navair2]

What do you mean by that? Do you think it's no different than reading the newspaper or a magazine? Do you also believe that it doesn't need to be spiritually discerned?

Yes I do believe that it needs to be spiritually ( 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 ) discerned.

Of course. But, we have to understand what the words are saying first. That is not just automatic. It requires revelation from the Holy Spirit.

I agree.

No, not at all. You have a bad habit of asking ridiculous questions.

And I think you have a bad habit of labeling questions that people ask, as being worthy of riducule by saying that they are ridiculous.

I'm not trying to offend you, I'm simply asking questions to provoke thought.

I just don't agree with you on what it says.

That's fine, and I don't hold that against you in any way.

However, can two walk together unless they be agreed ( Amos 3:3 )?
No.
That is why I don't interact with a-millennialists very often...
Because of the disagreement with what the words of Revelation 20 actually say.

Good evening to you, sir, and may God bless you in many ways.

 

[TribulationSigns]

No.
Again, He is awaiting the time until His Father sends Him to earth the second time.
He will then take up His throne at Jerusalem.

False.

Rev 12:4-5
(4) And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
(5) And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

Christ ascended into heaven and to his throne. He already a ruling king of the kingdom he established through the Church.

Again, His physical reign will be at Jerusalem.

False. He is already ruling a spiritual kingdom called "New Jerusalem" He will not rule a physical kingdom with a physical capital city of Jerusalem as premillennialists believe.

Do you believe the prophecies of Zechariah 12, Zechariah 14, Micah 4 and several other will be fulfilled literally, or not?

No, you need to read our earlier posts above.

 

[DavidPT]

Do you think that the Holy Spirit can't be referred to symbolically or something? That's how you're coming across here.

Look at this:

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

In this passage Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit symbolically as "rivers of living water". But, for some reason, Zechariah 14:8 can't refer to the Holy Spirit symbolically as well?

Allow me to explain my thinking then. Maybe you will see my point, or maybe not.


Zechariah 14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.


This is what the text says in the KJV, so IOW....

And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of the living waters toward the former sea, and half of the living waters toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

In this particular case, how can that be understood any other way but literal? Though I'm not convinced that everything recorded in Zechariah 14 should be taken in the literal sense, that doesn't mean some of it is not meaning in the literal sense, though.
'

In Zechariah 14:8 the text says half of them, then it says half of them again. Half of what? Living waters of course. Not living water, living waters. That means if we have the Holy Spirit meaning the living waters, we have to replace the 2 'them' in that verse with Holy Spirit, thus we end up with--- half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be--this is what I find renders the text nonsensical. But if that actually still makes sense to you, explain in what way that it does?

And it shall be in that day, that the Holy Spirit shall go out from Jerusalem. At this point I wouldn't say this necessarily renders the text nonsensical, though I still disagree that the Holy Spirit is meant here. It's when we add the rest of the verse like such---half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be----that's what renders the text nonsensical, thus telling us that the Holy Spirit cannot be meant in this verse, because if the Holy Spirit was meant in this verse, the entire verse would be making good sense, not nonsense.